RE:RE:RE:RE:Law 360 article From a laymans reading Apple opening brief I am not impressed at all and concerned. Apple is now attaching the Judge Dana Sabraw for not supporting the first damage claim of $10 million and granting Motion for Stay.
In second trial for damages Apple contends ,we were overreaching . What did Apple expect when we went for second trial for damages for get 11 million and use same methodogy.
Totally ridiculous .And Apple now attacking pre-interest.
Chances are 95% that US Federal circuit will not reverse Judges ruling unless evident Judge errred greatly.
In Apple's opening brief to be attached by us in 45 in cross appeal I hope that not only to we support the 108 but go back to 145. The purpose of cross-appeal from what I have read is that party lodging cross-appeal disagrees with judge Dana Sabraw.
Apple is challenging Judge whichi hope does not sit to kindly with Federal Curcuit. Judge Sabraw from my observation gave Apple more leeway than with WiLan.
What is not mentioned is that Apple had made an offer of $ 25 million after time limit.
T